Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 3:13 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: OK, I will wait further for the information. It is pretty important to me to determine if it is at all possible for enough energy to be stored and then released to achieve Rossi's results. A good model such as your friends would help immensely. You need to understand that it might become apparent that his model is not accurate since many vorts have the belief that Rossi's results are sound, but I will accept his conclusion if it passes my very difficult tests. My present feelings are that his model will fall short, but he can convince me otherwise. Sorry but I think my acquaintance doesn't wish to play with this any more. Maybe if Rossi does another show and tell, he'll get involved again -- I'll certainly ask him to if it seems indicated. Thanks for being a good sport about it. It's a ways away but looking forward to ICCF 17, we should know a lot more by then. If nothing is available to industry and the general public by then, and Rossi and Defkalion don't make an excellent showing at the meeting, it's probably all been fake.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 4:06 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: It is not sufficient evidence, but it still can be interpreted as evidence of nuclear reactions. Your alternative doesn't persuade me that the heat produced is worthless as evidence. As everyone knows, there are countless ways to fake the results. Each alternative suggests places where evidence of fraud might be found. In your thermal mass alternative you need to look for evidence that he misrepresented the electrical input power. Otherwise it is just an intellectual exercise. Apparently the spam filter ate some of your responses-- sorry. From what was recovered, I received this answer but I am not sure what it specifically responds to so I hope it's reasonably evident: I do not understand Harry’s objection. The electric power considered in the model is represented by the blue curve in the upper left diagram of http://i.imgur.com/SWbvW.jpg jpeg. This curve shows the exact data of the electrical power supplied to the ecat as reported by Lewan in his report http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3284962.ece/BINARY/. Is Harry saying that Lewan faked the data? By increasing their values? The diagram on the right shows the energy balance. The electricity consumption (blue curve) is almost twice the heat removed by the flow coming out from the ecat (red curve). The other 2 curves represent the energy stored in the metal screen (gray line) and that stored in the water of the ecat pool (green line). There is no need for any chemical energy! The model is very simple, as the ecat seems to be too *Occam docet. * The red curve in the energy diagram represents the integral of the red curve in the diagram of power and therefore includes the thermal energy removed by both the steam and the liquid. The thermal power removed was calculated on the basis of flows calculated from the model itself and shown in the diagram at the bottom left of the jpeg http://i.imgur.com/XAdrr.jpg. The outflow in the vapor phase was calculated by considering the enthalpy of dry steam. The outflow in the liquid phase begins when the ecat pool becomes full of water and is calculated based on the enthalpy of liquid. The thermal power associated with vapor outflow reaches a peak of 1800 W, right at the maximum in the curve of delta T measured on the secondary loop, shown on the bottom left diagram. The final peak in this last curve can be associated with the start of liquid outflow. Thus, we see that the curve of the secondary delta T follows accurately, qualitatively at least, the heat trend of the primary outflow calculated by the mathematical model. I have forwarded David's newest question. Sorry about the delays.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: I do not understand Harry’s objection. The electric power considered in the model is represented by the blue curve in the upper left diagram of http://i.imgur.com/SWbvW.jpg jpeg. This curve shows the exact data of the electrical power supplied to the ecat as reported by Lewan in his report http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3284962.ece/BINARY/. This link above may have gotten scrambled in transmission. I think all the NyTeknik links can be accessed from this article of theirs: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3295411.ece The link I received from my informant and tried to repair was, literally this one: http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3284962.ece/BINARY/Test+of+E-cat+October+6+ 28pdf% 29% in that exact form. Sometimes email clients are not kindly to links and interpret/parse them badly!
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 8:06 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It is certainly true that the peak occurs in a region that immediately follows the highest temperature obtained within the heat storage medium. The part that is anomalous is the fact that the bump I referred to at 16:00 is of relatively short duration while the temperature fall off curve from the model storage medium is broad and slow in nature. I would expect the overpressure additions to be broad to match this shape if due to the stored heat. The LENR explanation would be short in duration as is seen in the data. We should be happy that The LENR heating is demonstrated by this short duration bump as we have all been seeking. Your source should make further attempts to duplicate this shape if we are to be convinced that heat storage can achieve the identical results as LENR heating. The reply: == *Dave compared **the curve T2(mis) with the curve T_S of the screen S. That’s not correct. He should compare the T2(mis) with the efflux of steam Q_Vvap -- they show a quite similar bump.* * * * The curve Q_Vvap depends on the trends T_A, T_B and T_R, ie the temperature of the 3 components that supply heat to the water and that in turn receive it from the internal screen S. The curve Q_Vvap has a peak of about 0.7 g / s of dry steam, which means a volumetric flow rate well over 1L / s, whose passage through the valve V causes an overpressure at the outlet, which must be overcome by increasing the saturation pressure and hence the boiling temperature. This cause the bump in the T2(mis) curve. I think that Harry should make some further efforts to try to better understand the thermodynamics of such a simple model, in order to better figure out how the ecat really works.* == *Please note that this is the last relay I am going to do. My informant said he thinks that showing people what Rossi is most likely really doing and doing that on Vortex, at least for some of the participants, is like telling small children that Santa Claus doesn't exist. LOL. PS: his words -- not mine. But feel free to shoot the messenger if it makes you feel any better. *
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
Mary, it is quite unfortunate that he does not want to share additional information concerning his model. This is just the sort of model that is needed to determine whether or not it is possible to replicate Rossi results with heat storage. I am trying to keep an open mind as much as possible in this case and really would like to proceed with more details. Please discuss this with the guy and let me know if he really wants to find the truth. I can only assume that he is hiding something if he runs like this when asked probing questions. I have many more items to compare. It might be possible that I am reading your friends output in an erroneous manner. I thought that he had a direct model of the temperature at T2 just as with the real ECAT. Why would we not compare these two curves if they are available? This is more like comparing apples with apples versus some other parameter. Does he in fact calculate the water temperature or did I miss something? By the way, it is nonsense to suggest that this is like showing that Santa does not exist. I am maintaining an open mind regarding whether or not Rossi is real in this case and it would be a crime to assume otherwise. I seek the truth only. Dave -Original Message- From: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Dec 24, 2011 4:46 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 8:06 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It is certainly true that the peak occurs in a region that immediately follows the highest temperature obtained within the heat storage medium. The part that is anomalous is the fact that the bump I referred to at 16:00 is of relatively short duration while the temperature fall off curve from the model storage medium is broad and slow in nature. I would expect the overpressure additions to be broad to match this shape if due to the stored heat. The LENR explanation would be short in duration as is seen in the data. We should be happy that The LENR heating is demonstrated by this short duration bump as we have all been seeking. Your source should make further attempts to duplicate this shape if we are to be convinced that heat storage can achieve the identical results as LENR heating. The reply: == Dave compared the curve T2(mis) with the curve T_S of the screen S. That’s not correct. He should compare the T2(mis) with the efflux of steam Q_Vvap -- they show a quite similar bump. The curve Q_Vvap depends on the trends T_A, T_B and T_R, ie the temperature of the 3 components that supply heat to the water and that in turn receive it from the internal screen S. The curve Q_Vvap has a peak of about 0.7 g / s of dry steam, which means a volumetric flow rate well over 1L / s, whose passage through the valve V causes an overpressure at the outlet, which must be overcome by increasing the saturation pressure and hence the boiling temperature. This cause the bump in the T2(mis) curve. I think that Harry should make some further efforts to try to better understand the thermodynamics of such a simple model, in order to better figure out how the ecat really works. == Please note that this is the last relay I am going to do. My informant said he thinks that showing people what Rossi is most likely really doing and doing that on Vortex, at least for some of the participants, is like telling small children that Santa Claus doesn't exist. LOL. PS: his words -- not mine. But feel free to shoot the messenger if it makes you feel any better. -Original Message- From: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Dec 24, 2011 4:46 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 8:06 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It is certainly true that the peak occurs in a region that immediately follows the highest temperature obtained within the heat storage medium. The part that is anomalous is the fact that the bump I referred to at 16:00 is of relatively short duration while the temperature fall off curve from the model storage medium is broad and slow in nature. I would expect the overpressure additions to be broad to match this shape if due to the stored heat. The LENR explanation would be short in duration as is seen in the data. We should be happy that The LENR heating is demonstrated by this short duration bump as we have all been seeking. Your source should make further attempts to duplicate this shape if we are to be convinced that heat storage can achieve the identical results as LENR heating. The reply: == Dave compared the curve T2(mis) with the curve T_S of the screen S. That’s not correct. He should compare the T2(mis) with the efflux of steam Q_Vvap -- they show a quite similar bump. The curve
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
Mary, what is going on with your messages to this subject at times 12:13 and 12:21? I can not get them to load properly with my system. This was tried several times to no avail. Dave
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 2:35 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Mary, it is quite unfortunate that he does not want to share additional information concerning his model. This is just the sort of model that is needed to determine whether or not it is possible to replicate Rossi results with heat storage. I am trying to keep an open mind as much as possible in this case and really would like to proceed with more details. Please discuss this with the guy and let me know if he really wants to find the truth. I can only assume that he is hiding something if he runs like this when asked probing questions. I have many more items to compare. It might be possible that I am reading your friends output in an erroneous manner. I thought that he had a direct model of the temperature at T2 just as with the real ECAT. Why would we not compare these two curves if they are available? This is more like comparing apples with apples versus some other parameter. Does he in fact calculate the water temperature or did I miss something? By the way, it is nonsense to suggest that this is like showing that Santa does not exist. I am maintaining an open mind regarding whether or not Rossi is real in this case and it would be a crime to assume otherwise. I seek the truth only. Dave Hi Dave, After Xmas, I'll approach him to see if he wants to continue. I doubt he has anything to hide but he's busy and Rossi to him is just a diversion. I'm pretty sure he does calculate the output water temperature. I will look again later at the curves and ask him about it. I have also suggested to him to get his own anonymous email and to interact directly. The Santa reference doesn't refer to you or to anyone else who has an open mind and includes in their thinking the substantial probability that Rossi does not have what he claims and that his experiments were in some way deceptive. I suspect it's about people who write like Jed and Aussieguy but then, it wasn't my analogy so I really don't know. Merry Xmas. M. Y.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
OK, I will wait further for the information. It is pretty important to me to determine if it is at all possible for enough energy to be stored and then released to achieve Rossi's results. A good model such as your friends would help immensely. You need to understand that it might become apparent that his model is not accurate since many vorts have the belief that Rossi's results are sound, but I will accept his conclusion if it passes my very difficult tests. My present feelings are that his model will fall short, but he can convince me otherwise. Dave -Original Message- From: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Dec 24, 2011 5:52 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 2:35 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Mary, it is quite unfortunate that he does not want to share additional information concerning his model. This is just the sort of model that is needed to determine whether or not it is possible to replicate Rossi results with heat storage. I am trying to keep an open mind as much as possible in this case and really would like to proceed with more details. Please discuss this with the guy and let me know if he really wants to find the truth. I can only assume that he is hiding something if he runs like this when asked probing questions. I have many more items to compare. It might be possible that I am reading your friends output in an erroneous manner. I thought that he had a direct model of the temperature at T2 just as with the real ECAT. Why would we not compare these two curves if they are available? This is more like comparing apples with apples versus some other parameter. Does he in fact calculate the water temperature or did I miss something? By the way, it is nonsense to suggest that this is like showing that Santa does not exist. I am maintaining an open mind regarding whether or not Rossi is real in this case and it would be a crime to assume otherwise. I seek the truth only. Dave Hi Dave, After Xmas, I'll approach him to see if he wants to continue. I doubt he has anything to hide but he's busy and Rossi to him is just a diversion. I'm pretty sure he does calculate the output water temperature. I will look again later at the curves and ask him about it. I have also suggested to him to get his own anonymous email and to interact directly. The Santa reference doesn't refer to you or to anyone else who has an open mind and includes in their thinking the substantial probability that Rossi does not have what he claims and that his experiments were in some way deceptive. I suspect it's about people who write like Jed and Aussieguy but then, it wasn't my analogy so I really don't know. Merry Xmas. M. Y.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
If you wrap the link in these, it should better survive travel. On Dec 24, 2011, at 12:21, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Sometimes email clients are not kindly to links and interpret/parse them badly!
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
I have no trouble with any other posts, only those 2. I have received many links before with no issues. Dave -Original Message- From: Charles Hope lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Dec 24, 2011 6:18 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith If you wrap the link in these, it should better survive travel. On Dec 24, 2011, at 12:21, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Sometimes email clients are not kindly to links and interpret/parse them badly!
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 3:25 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I have no trouble with any other posts, only those 2. I have received many links before with no issues. Dave If you send me the bad links, either privately or on the list, I'll rewrite them as tinuyurls. @Charles: You wrap what in ? Links or just email addresses. Never heard of doing that with links.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
Yes, links. Mailers are supposed to preserve links inside the brackets. It's a little known fact, but hopefully all the writers of mail software remember it. On Dec 24, 2011, at 19:38, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 3:25 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I have no trouble with any other posts, only those 2. I have received many links before with no issues. Dave If you send me the bad links, either privately or on the list, I'll rewrite them as tinuyurls. @Charles: You wrap what in ? Links or just email addresses. Never heard of doing that with links.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
Continuing the discussion of the mathematical modeling proposed for the October 6 experiment, my informant, who still prefers to remain anonymous, remarked that the examples suggested by Jed and others (nails, anvils and the like) are not comparable to the October 6 experiment which involved a much larger and substantially more massive E-cat than before. The informant now provided computations of the power and energy vs time curves for the model, assuming only electrical (Joule) heating (no LENR reaction) as you can see here: http://i.imgur.com/SWbvW.jpg Once again, the original diagram of the model and temperature vs time curves are here: http://i.imgur.com/XAdrr.jpg My contact says: *Of course the model is an approximation of reality and many details of the ecat are unknown, for instance I assumed there were lower fins (I saw it here http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg52853.html ) but I am not sure it was right. Anyway, the model shows that a few dozen kilograms of iron, well placed around the electric heater, (no hidden source is needed) would be able to keep the water boiling for nearly 4 hours. See the temperature vs time curves for points R, A, and B. They remain above the boiling point well after the reactor shutdown. This confirms that Lewan was right when he reported feeling the boiling after the shutdown. Lewan also said that he measured an external temperature ranging from 65 to 80°C. This is compatible with the model's temperature/time curve for point C (T sub C on the plot).But the best confirmation of the validity of the model is the trend of the temperatures after the shutdown -- the curve from the model for point T2 follows the measured plot from the experiment reasonably closely.* *I think that Lewan is honest about what he personally sees and measures but he may be wrong some of the time when he bases his conclusions on data reported by others. * Once again: this is *not* my work. I am simply passing it on. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to forward them to my source person and relay the answers back.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
I have a model that shows that a few dozen kilograms of Mary Yugo, well
placed around the vortex list, would be able to self sustain flooding for
days...
I feel sorry i can't provide any data analysis right now as i am actually
filling a patent to protect my secret catalyst ('JR', don't tell), but
believe me the numbers are huge, COP is unbelievable, over-unity is going
down!
I wish i could have a good sense of fairness and willingness to conduct
basic scientific experiments on this device but i don't understand it, all
i know is that it makes some smoke and a lot of noise. I wish i could
invoke a secret contact to replicate the experiment but he is very busy
delivering some packages. Anyway i am pretty sure the results would end up
in an endless discussion about bad calorimetry based on a video i saw on
youtube and there is really no need because everyone can count up to 600
something, right ?
Only a simulation showing some fancy curves can convince most of the
skeptics that the effect is real, however the data might be faked, you know
JPEG pictures do lose some information when processed. The 'patho' skeptics
will not be convinced, but this is expected.
I am glad there is also no need to open a factory to mass produce them and
ask for investors as this would be flagged as a potential nuclear spam
reaction, the whole internet would probably shut down.
I almost forgot, here as some numbers required to conclude my scientific
analysis : 4, 8, 15,16, 23, 42
All this is just hearsay please don't tell you've heard it from me as i
would make it an inadvertent mistake, my memory is bad, my browser is slow,
i don't want to read any scientific papers about it, unicorns keep playing
mean tricks on me and i like to continuously repeat the same mixed things
to make it look worse than it really is. Of course this message is full of
crazy crackpot claims as to comply with the list rules.
Please ignore the objections to my claims they won't particularly help
anyone as they are easily proven many times over at little risk,cost and
this does not need third party testing, i have closed the loop, this test
has been running for too long, i'm shutting down.
Wait, i hear something, damn, someone just turned on the front door knob
reactor.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
Hello Mary, I wonder if you could ask your source to explain the bump in the curve that occurs at 16:00 on the second chart? It looks like this is not demonstrated in any of his curves. The bump is in the temperature of the ECAT water bath T2 and is very distinct. Dave -Original Message- From: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Dec 23, 2011 3:13 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith Continuing the discussion of the mathematical modeling proposed for the October 6 experiment, my informant, who still prefers to remain anonymous, remarked that the examples suggested by Jed and others (nails, anvils and the like) are not comparable to the October 6 experiment which involved a much larger and substantially more massive E-cat than before. The informant now provided computations of the power and energy vs time curves for the model, assuming only electrical (Joule) heating (no LENR reaction) as you can see here: http://i.imgur.com/SWbvW.jpg Once again, the original diagram of the model and temperature vs time curves are here: http://i.imgur.com/XAdrr.jpg My contact says: Of course the model is an approximation of reality and many details of the ecat are unknown, for instance I assumed there were lower fins (I saw it here http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg52853.html ) but I am not sure it was right. Anyway, the model shows that a few dozen kilograms of iron, well placed around the electric heater, (no hidden source is needed) would be able to keep the water boiling for nearly 4 hours. See the temperature vs time curves for points R, A, and B. They remain above the boiling point well after the reactor shutdown. This confirms that Lewan was right when he reported feeling the boiling after the shutdown. Lewan also said that he measured an external temperature ranging from 65 to 80°C. This is compatible with the model's temperature/time curve for point C (T sub C on the plot).But the best confirmation of the validity of the model is the trend of the temperatures after the shutdown -- the curve from the model for point T2 follows the measured plot from the experiment reasonably closely. I think that Lewan is honest about what he personally sees and measures but he may be wrong some of the time when he bases his conclusions on data reported by others. Once again: this is *not* my work. I am simply passing it on. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to forward them to my source person and relay the answers back.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 7:37 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Hello Mary, I wonder if you could ask your source to explain the bump in the curve Done, thanks.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 3:13 AM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Continuing the discussion of the mathematical modeling proposed for the October 6 experiment, my informant, who still prefers to remain anonymous, remarked that the examples suggested by Jed and others (nails, anvils and the like) are not comparable to the October 6 experiment which involved a much larger and substantially more massive E-cat than before. The informant now provided computations of the power and energy vs time curves for the model, assuming only electrical (Joule) heating (no LENR reaction) as you can see here: http://i.imgur.com/SWbvW.jpg Once again, the original diagram of the model and temperature vs time curves are here: http://i.imgur.com/XAdrr.jpg snip For this to work the electrical input power measurements must have been incorrect or fake, because it would require more power to heat the iron to such a high temperature than was apparently supplied to the ecat. What specific evidence do you have that the Oct. 6 demo is a fake? A plausible method of fakery is not evidence of fakery. Harry Harry
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: A plausible method of fakery is not evidence of fakery. Obviously not. But heat, by itself, is not evidence of a nuclear reaction, if the same heat can be plausibly produced without nuclear reactions. Similarly, if I claimed to have superhuman strength, I would not convince anyone by lifting a 50-lb bag of sugar, because you can lift 50 lb without superhuman strength.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 7:37 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I wonder if you could ask your source to explain the bump in the curve that occurs at 16:00 on the second chart? It looks like this is not demonstrated in any of his curves. The bump is in the temperature of the ECAT water bath T2 and is very distinct. Here is the reply: If you are referring to the green curve T_2w, it is not a bump, it is a sharp angle. It appears when the water temperature reaches the boiling point correspondent to the pressure inside the ecat. From that point on, the water temperature no longer rises due to evaporation. That pressure includes an over pressure due to the relief valve, which has been supposed to be 0.8 bar. That's the point where the T_2w deviates more from the measured value T2(mis), for the rest of the time difference is less than 5°C. Also, consider that the thermocouple was placed between the fins of the heat exchanger and remains above the water for the first part of the transient. In addition, the internal pressure in the ecat, and hence the temperature, can change depending on the steam/water outflow. These phenomena are not included in the model.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
The curve I was referring to is the T2(mis) curve. There is a well defined bump that peaks at 16:00 time. This is one of the curves of the actual ECAT measurement and I was looking to see if your source demonstrated anything resembling it. I was expecting to see a reason that the model did not predict the relatively short duration bump that is so evident. Unless I am wrong, I interpret his explanation as not really knowing since this is the region where the most temperature delta occurs between his model and the real world. That is an OK answer for him to have-his model does not include the possibility that the LENR reaction produces a large pulse at this time due to the drive waveform that I described in my analysis explaining this bump. Also, the output power measurement at the same time shows a COP of 3 matching the input power pulse. We may have found additional proof that LENR is occurring which a non LENR model can not explain. Thanks Mary. Dave -Original Message- From: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Dec 23, 2011 3:36 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 7:37 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I wonder if you could ask your source to explain the bump in the curve that occurs at 16:00 on the second chart? It looks like this is not demonstrated in any of his curves. The bump is in the temperature of the ECAT water bath T2 and is very distinct. Here is the reply: If you are referring to the green curve T_2w, it is not a bump, it is a sharp angle. It appears when the water temperature reaches the boiling point correspondent to the pressure inside the ecat. From that point on, the water temperature no longer rises due to evaporation. That pressure includes an over pressure due to the relief valve, which has been supposed to be 0.8 bar. That's the point where the T_2w deviates more from the measured value T2(mis), for the rest of the time difference is less than 5°C. Also, consider that the thermocouple was placed between the fins of the heat exchanger and remains above the water for the first part of the transient. In addition, the internal pressure in the ecat, and hence the temperature, can change depending on the steam/water outflow. These phenomena are not included in the model.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The curve I was referring to is the T2(mis) curve. There is a well defined bump that peaks at 16:00 time. This is one of the curves of the actual ECAT measurement and I was looking to see if your source demonstrated anything resembling it. I was expecting to see a reason that the model did not predict the relatively short duration bump that is so evident. Unless I am wrong, I interpret his explanation as not really knowing since this is the region where the most temperature delta occurs between his model and the real world. That is an OK answer for him to have-his model does not include the possibility that the LENR reaction produces a large pulse at this time due to the drive waveform that I described in my analysis explaining this bump. Also, the output power measurement at the same time shows a COP of 3 matching the input power pulse. I'll pass that on. We may have found additional proof that LENR is occurring which a non LENR model can not explain. Maybe but I doubt it. I am still amazed that we have to go through all these unnecessary convolutions of thought and calculations only because Rossi made his all of his tests so opaque and dependent on his methodology and interpretation. Thanks Mary. Welcome.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
At 07:10 AM 12/23/2011, Yram Oguy wrote: Ha! Your cleverly disguised name is a FAKE. Your REAL name is Yra M. O'Guy so .. BUSTED !
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: A plausible method of fakery is not evidence of fakery. Obviously not. But heat, by itself, is not evidence of a nuclear reaction, if the same heat can be plausibly produced without nuclear reactions. It is not sufficient evidence, but it still can be interpreted as evidence of nuclear reactions. Your alternative doesn't persuade me that the heat produced is worthless as evidence. As everyone knows, there are countless ways to fake the results. Each alternative suggests places where evidence of fraud might be found. In your thermal mass alternative you need to look for evidence that he misrepresented the electrical input power. Otherwise it is just an intellectual exercise. Similarly, if I claimed to have superhuman strength, I would not convince anyone by lifting a 50-lb bag of sugar, because you can lift 50 lb without superhuman strength. The analogy doesn't make sense to me. I think what you mean is that you show yourself effortlessly lifting 500lbs of sugar with one hand, while the lifting was actually done by a piano wire attached to a hidden hoist above the proscenium. Harry
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The curve I was referring to is the T2(mis) curve. There is a well defined bump that peaks at 16:00 time. This is one of the curves of the actual ECAT measurement and I was looking to see if your source demonstrated anything resembling it. I was expecting to see a reason that the model did not predict the relatively short duration bump that is so evident. Unless I am wrong, I interpret his explanation as not really knowing since this is the region where the most temperature delta occurs between his model and the real world. That is an OK answer for him to have-his model does not include the possibility that the LENR reaction produces a large pulse at this time due to the drive waveform that I described in my analysis explaining this bump. Also, the output power measurement at the same time shows a COP of 3 matching the input power pulse. We may have found additional proof that LENR is occurring which a non LENR model can not explain. Thanks Mary. Reply: He is right. I did not understand correctly the curve he was referring to. But my previous answer to his question did (sort of) contain the explanation: the bump in the T2(mis) curve at 16:00 happens at the same time as the steam outflow peak, as shown on the lower left diagram of http://i.imgur.com/XAdrr.jpg, and in the upper left diagram of http://i.imgur.com/SWbvW.jpg. In the real life situation, this outflow peak induces some additional overpressure which increases the boiling temperature of the water in the ecat, but this portion of the relationship has not been modeled.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
Another secret contact! Why can't your friend create a throwaway hotmail account like anyone else? On Dec 23, 2011, at 12:27, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 7:37 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Hello Mary, I wonder if you could ask your source to explain the bump in the curve Done, thanks.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: It is not sufficient evidence, but it still can be interpreted as evidence of nuclear reactions. I don't agree. Not if the heat is coming from a 100 kg device that we're not allowed to inspect. If it were heat + commensurate radiation (in any form), then yes. If it were heat without any chemical changes after detailed inspection, then yes. If it were heat that exceeded the devices weight in the best chemical fuel, then yes. But just heat that represents less than a per cent of chemical energy density, then, to me, there is no evidence of a nuclear reaction whatsoever. And as always, the epilogue: if it were nuclear, it would be easy to unequivocally exceed the limits of chemistry. Your alternative doesn't persuade me that the heat produced is worthless as evidence. As everyone knows, there are countless ways to fake the results. Each alternative suggests places where evidence of fraud might be found. In your thermal mass alternative you need to look for evidence that he misrepresented the electrical input power. I haven't looked at the model that MY introduced in detail, but in broad strokes, I don't see a need to misrepresent the input power, even for an energy storage explanation, and still less for energy from chemical fuel. The input energy is in the range of 34 MJ, and the hard evidence can be explained with only about 12 MJ. What does need to be questioned is the energy as measured with the misplaced thermocouples on the heat exchanger, and the claim that the steam coming out of the ecat is dry. Similarly, if I claimed to have superhuman strength, I would not convince anyone by lifting a 50-lb bag of sugar, because you can lift 50 lb without superhuman strength. The analogy doesn't make sense to me. I think what you mean is that you show yourself effortlessly lifting 500lbs of sugar with one hand, while the lifting was actually done by a piano wire attached to a hidden hoist above the proscenium. No, I think my analogy is closer. Rossi is claiming nuclear reactions based on the heat produced in a 100-kg device. There is no question that a 100 kg device can produce that amount of heat using only chemistry, with no strings attached. Ten times that would be easy.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
It is certainly true that the peak occurs in a region that immediately follows the highest temperature obtained within the heat storage medium. The part that is anomalous is the fact that the bump I referred to at 16:00 is of relatively short duration while the temperature fall off curve from the model storage medium is broad and slow in nature. I would expect the overpressure additions to be broad to match this shape if due to the stored heat. The LENR explanation would be short in duration as is seen in the data. We should be happy that The LENR heating is demonstrated by this short duration bump as we have all been seeking. Your source should make further attempts to duplicate this shape if we are to be convinced that heat storage can achieve the identical results as LENR heating. Dave -Original Message- From: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Dec 23, 2011 7:15 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The curve I was referring to is the T2(mis) curve. There is a well defined bump that peaks at 16:00 time. This is one of the curves of the actual ECAT measurement and I was looking to see if your source demonstrated anything resembling it. I was expecting to see a reason that the model did not predict the relatively short duration bump that is so evident. Unless I am wrong, I interpret his explanation as not really knowing since this is the region where the most temperature delta occurs between his model and the real world. That is an OK answer for him to have-his model does not include the possibility that the LENR reaction produces a large pulse at this time due to the drive waveform that I described in my analysis explaining this bump. Also, the output power measurement at the same time shows a COP of 3 matching the input power pulse. We may have found additional proof that LENR is occurring which a non LENR model can not explain. Thanks Mary. Reply: He is right. I did not understand correctly the curve he was referring to. But my previous answer to his question did (sort of) contain the explanation: the bump in the T2(mis) curve at 16:00 happens at the same time as the steam outflow peak, as shown on the lower left diagram of http://i.imgur.com/XAdrr.jpg, and in the upper left diagram of http://i.imgur.com/SWbvW.jpg. In the real life situation, this outflow peak induces some additional overpressure which increases the boiling temperature of the water in the ecat, but this portion of the relationship has not been modeled.
[Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Am I to assume you examined the mathematical modeling and resulting curves in the links I provided and have analyzed and rejected them for some good reason? Yes. I have seen blacksmiths at work. I have seen one heat a large chunk of iron, as big as the reactor core, to red hot incandescence. This is hotter than an electric heater could make the core. The iron is dunked into a bucket of water. This produces a cloud of steam, and then rapid boiling for a minute or two. It does not cause the bucket of water to boil for four hours. There is no conceivable way to store that much heat in this much iron. You can verify that with a small-scale experiment. Try heating a nail and putting it in water. I seriously suggest people should try this. Why not? a skeptic who sincerely believes it is possible to achieve this effect by conventional means should do some simple tests to confirm that. Evidently the mathematical modeling is wrong. I do not have to determine the details when it is obvious the conclusions conflict with everyday experience and fundamental observational physics to this extent. If someone makes a mathematical model showing that I can jump over the Empire State building I do not need to prove it is wrong. Note that Rossi means Smith. Perhaps he comes from a long line of blacksmiths. He has the kind of intuitive skills that a good blacksmith has. People have been working with hot iron for thousands of years. They know how it works. I know how it works. All the skeptical hypotheses that attempt to explain these test contradict knowledge going back hundreds of thousands of years. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
Rossi is an extremely common Italian surname. I can see Rossi used as a name of a company everywhere here, since several million people in my country descends from Italians. 2011/12/22 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Note that Rossi means Smith. Perhaps he comes from a long line of blacksmiths. He has the kind of intuitive skills that a good blacksmith has. People have been working with hot iron for thousands of years. They know how it works. I know how it works. All the skeptical hypotheses that attempt to explain these test contradict knowledge going back hundreds of thousands of years. - Jed -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
From Mary Yugo: Am I to assume you examined the mathematical modeling and resulting curves in the links I provided and have analyzed and rejected them for some good reason? I assume you addressed this query to Mr. Rothwell. Nevertheless, I have two cents of my own to add. Having run thousands of computer simulations using FEMM (Finite Element Method Magnetics) I can say with absolute conviction that the results will be completely worthless if the input and results generated from the computer model are based on inaccurate assumptions. I have been guilty of making such mistakes. My mistakes were brought to my attention when I eventually got around to producing an actual physical model - which was supposed to verify to my satisfaction that all the prior mathematical modeling I had been generating for months was correct. Alas, my assumptions turned out to be wrong, dead wrong. This revelation... well... I can certainly say that it felt personally humiliating. However, I would not have traded the experience for anything in the world. Garbage in, garbage out. Mary, as already suggested by Mr. Rothwell, I suggest you might want to consider performing an actual physical experiment. I'm sure you have sufficient tools at your disposal to perform such an experiment. For example, if you have access to an electric stove, heat up one of the smaller elements to the point that it becomes red hot. Then, carefully remove it from the stove (using tongs and insulated gloves!) and dump it into a pail of water. Carefully record the temperature of the water over a passage of time. Be sure to have some fun while performing the experiment. It's science! Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Dec 22, 2011, at 7:29 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Am I to assume you examined the mathematical modeling and resulting curves in the links I provided and have analyzed and rejected them for some good reason? Yes. I have seen blacksmiths at work. I have seen one heat a large chunk of iron, as big as the reactor core, to red hot incandescence. This is hotter than an electric heater could make the core. The iron is dunked into a bucket of water. This produces a cloud of steam, and then rapid boiling for a minute or two. It does not cause the bucket of water to boil for four hours. There is no conceivable way to store that much heat in this much iron. You can verify that with a small-scale experiment. Try heating a nail and putting it in water. I seriously suggest people should try this. Why not? a skeptic who sincerely believes it is possible to achieve this effect by conventional means should do some simple tests to confirm that. Evidently the mathematical modeling is wrong. I do not have to determine the details when it is obvious the conclusions conflict with everyday experience and fundamental observational physics to this extent. If someone makes a mathematical model showing that I can jump over the Empire State building I do not need to prove it is wrong. Note that Rossi means Smith. Perhaps he comes from a long line of blacksmiths. He has the kind of intuitive skills that a good blacksmith has. People have been working with hot iron for thousands of years. They know how it works. I know how it works. All the skeptical hypotheses that attempt to explain these test contradict knowledge going back hundreds of thousands of years. - Jed The heat capacity of a conductor like iron is only useful for storing energy. Insulation is required to limit the rate of dissipation of that energy. A medium, or combined layers, with a net low diffusivity, using materials like ceramics, cement, fire brick, etc. is necessary for significant dynamic effects, like peak heat release long after the source was applied. Those are the purely passive considerations. If good insulation is present, as well as active control, heat can be released to meet any demand curve that conserves energy. Apparently commenting further is of no use, so I'll try to refrain. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 9:10 AM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote: Mary, as already suggested by Mr. Rothwell, I suggest you might want to consider performing an actual physical experiment. I'm sure you have sufficient tools at your disposal to perform such an experiment. For example, if you have access to an electric stove, heat up one of the smaller elements to the point that it becomes red hot. Then, carefully remove it from the stove (using tongs and insulated gloves!) and dump it into a pail of water.SNIP Rossi is not dumping a preheated steel mass into a bucket of water. He's insulating it very carefully and trickling water through it at a very modest rate. I've always been struck at the low and hesitant flow from his pumps. Click... click..click.. And the flow measurements are not impressive. There is discussion at the links I provided that the October 6 flow rate also may have been mismeasured. I admit I did not read that -- the translation really annoys me and I know absolutely no Italian. Anyway, and I don't want to restart that argument all over again, with the output levels Rossi claimed in his early experiments, I'd expect a very healthy looking output of heat and steam and that is not what independent observers, for example Krivit, saw. And to go way back in the history, Levi's claim of a 130kW transient in a small E-cat has to be a measurement or thermocouple placement error -- it should have made enough steam pressure to explode (or to pop a relief plug or valve) if it were real. I won't point out again the details of how these arguments could all have been easily avoided if Rossi had chosen to bother.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
Jed, Rossi doesn't mean Smith. It is translated sometime by Google as Smith because Smith is such common name in the anglophone world and Rossi is an extremely common (if not the most common) Italian last names. Rossi means red one, probably the ancestors of this family were red headed. The last name Smith if translated literally would be Fabbri that is also a common last name in Italy. Giovanni On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: Rossi is an extremely common Italian surname. I can see Rossi used as a name of a company everywhere here, since several million people in my country descends from Italians. 2011/12/22 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Note that Rossi means Smith. Perhaps he comes from a long line of blacksmiths. He has the kind of intuitive skills that a good blacksmith has. People have been working with hot iron for thousands of years. They know how it works. I know how it works. All the skeptical hypotheses that attempt to explain these test contradict knowledge going back hundreds of thousands of years. - Jed -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
Giovanni Santostasi wrote: Rossi doesn't mean Smith. It is translated sometime by Google as Smith because Smith is such common name in the anglophone world and Rossi is an extremely common (if not the most common) Italian last names. Rossi means red one, probably the ancestors of this family were red headed. Wow! That gives us an interesting look at how Google translation works. The computer picks a word that is functionally similar. One that has similar uses, distribution or frequency. Or maybe it is a database error. The word roth also means red, in Middle English. Hence the placename and family name Rothwell means red well. That is, a well with reddish water from iron minerals in the water. See: http://www.rothwelltown.co.uk/historyofrothwel.html - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
Mary Yugo wrote: Rossi is not dumping a preheated steel mass into a bucket of water. He's insulating it very carefully and trickling water through it at a very modest rate. I've always been struck at the low and hesitant flow from his pumps. Click... click..click.. And the flow measurements are not impressive. It does not matter what rate you add the heat. The flow rate of the water is unimportant. It might be stopped altogether. It takes a certain amount of energy to keep the surface of the reactor at 80°C for four hours. That amount of energy far exceeds the amount that you could store or add to that mass of water and iron, using this equipment. Whether you heat it slow or fast, or heat it beforehand and hide the hot body it makes no difference. Whether the reactor holds mostly iron or mostly water makes no difference. No combination of these materials, insulation, flow rates or power levels can possible keep the surface temperature so high for so long. If you use other equipment that allowed the temperature internally to go up to thousands of degrees perhaps it could work. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
Jed sez: Wow! That gives us an interesting look at how Google translation works. The computer picks a word that is functionally similar. One that has similar uses, distribution or frequency. Or maybe it is a database error. The word roth also means red, in Middle English. Hence the placename and family name Rothwell means red well. That is, a well with reddish water from iron minerals in the water. See: So, not only were some your ancestors pirates, you probably had a few blacksmiths sprinkled in there as well. Hello... Yes... uh huh... we make cannon balls. How many would you you like to order? Uh hun... Three hundred fifty? Ok. I can have them ready for shipment in a week. That will cost you five gold pieces. Do you want them shipped by Oxcart or... ... you need them ASAP? Well... I can express the order by horse, ...actually with three hundred fifty balls... that would take several horses. But that would cost you extra... another two or three gold pieces. I can get them to you in two days. No... no sooner. Oh, by the way, I need two gold pieces down payment. Why? Well... considering your line of business... ...and the same to you to, sir! Do we have a deal? Yes... That is correct, sir. I don't think you will get a better deal anywhere else. Ok then. I'll be waiting for the pieces. Nice doing business with you! Martha! Remember that vacation trip you always wanted down to the Florida coast? Pack your bags! We'll be basking on the coast in two weeks! Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Am I to assume you examined the mathematical modeling and resulting curves in the links I provided and have analyzed and rejected them for some good reason? Yes. I have seen blacksmiths at work. I have seen one heat a large chunk of iron, as big as the reactor core, to red hot incandescence. The idea is the thermal mass might have tens of kg of mass. I don't think blacksmiths very often work with chunks of red-hot iron weighing 20 or 30 kg. This is hotter than an electric heater could make the core. Why? Electric heaters make stove-top elements glow red. The power goes in, something's gotta get hot. The iron is dunked into a bucket of water. This produces a cloud of steam, and then rapid boiling for a minute or two. It does not cause the bucket of water to boil for four hours. There is no conceivable way to store that much heat in this much iron. First, it's not as much iron as proposed for Rossi's 100-kg device. Second, it's doesn't have to be bathed in the water. There could be an insulating barrier to slow down the heat loss process. You can verify that with a small-scale experiment. Try heating a nail and putting it in water. What does that verify? Certainly nothing related to a 100-kg ecat with insulation between the thermal mass and the water. Evidently the mathematical modeling is wrong. I do not have to determine the details when it is obvious the conclusions conflict with everyday experience and fundamental observational physics to this extent. If someone makes a mathematical model showing that I can jump over the Empire State building I do not need to prove it is wrong. Hey, that sounds like the arguments nuclear physicists make about cold fusion. They don't have to bother debunking every new lame claim of cold fusion, when 100 years of experience with nuclear physics tells them it's wrong. The only difference is, their experience is actually relevant; yours is not: It's not rocket science. 30 kg of steel heated to 1000C releases 12 MJ of energy when it cools to 200C. Over 3.25 hours, that amounts to a kW on average. A kW is plenty of power to keep 30L of water boiling gently. The only difficulty is finding the material to keep the flow of heat in check. For this, a phase-change material would be much more compact, lower temperature, and easier to regulate. But to suggest it's inconceivable is just ignorant.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: It does not matter what rate you add the heat. The flow rate of the water is unimportant. It might be stopped altogether. It takes a certain amount of energy to keep the surface of the reactor at 80°C for four hours. Right. But Lewan said 60 - 80C, and I'm guessing since he's an advocate, it was probably closer to 60C, which is about 30C above ambient in that room. A hot-water radiator 30C above ambient delivers about 70 BTU/(hr-sq ft (effective area)), or about 200 W/m^2. That ecat has about 1 m^2 surface exposed, and it's not designed to throw heat, so its insulating surface is likely to have a lower emissivity, but even if it's 200 W, that's only a fraction of what you can store in 100 kg for 3.25 hours, which can easily be a few kW. And at 200 W, that would put about 10 kW into Rossi's megacat. That's more heat than most sauna heaters throw, and yet no one mentioned it was hot in there at all. So, I'm pretty sure it's nowhere near 200 W heat loss per ecat. That amount of energy far exceeds the amount that you could store or add to that mass of water and iron, The water's not relevant because the heat stored in it is not changed over the 3.25 hours. As for storing 200W times 3.25 hours (2.3 MJ) in 100 kg of metal? Piece of cake. In other materials, even easier.
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
Hi Jed, Google have published some details of their algorithm and that's pretty much how it works. If they want to do say English/Italian translation they find a lot of text (books, menus etc.) that exist in both languages and then they analyse the text counting words by frequency. This gives first mapping between words. There's a lot more to it but frequency mapping is a key element. They must have trained their system using some books where Rossi had been translated to Smith. It's interesting that the computer learns to translate just by analysis of these dual language texts and with very little human input or language understanding. Colin On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 4:29 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Giovanni Santostasi wrote: Rossi doesn't mean Smith. It is translated sometime by Google as Smith because Smith is such common name in the anglophone world and Rossi is an extremely common (if not the most common) Italian last names. Rossi means red one, probably the ancestors of this family were red headed. Wow! That gives us an interesting look at how Google translation works. The computer picks a word that is functionally similar. One that has similar uses, distribution or frequency. Or maybe it is a database error. The word roth also means red, in Middle English. Hence the placename and family name Rothwell means red well. That is, a well with reddish water from iron minerals in the water. See: http://www.rothwelltown.co.uk/**historyofrothwel.htmlhttp://www.rothwelltown.co.uk/historyofrothwel.html - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
Colin Hercus colinher...@gmail.com wrote: Google have published some details of their algorithm and that's pretty much how it works. Yup. I read some of their papers. It works surprisingly well. I guess Rossi = Smith can be considered a mistranslation. Then again, maybe this should be considered legit. It isn't how a human would do it, but arguably it is right in a sense. As they say, airplanes do not fly like birds, but they do fly. Machines may not translate like people, but they do translate. If it was English to Japanese you might select Suzuki-san. That's a common name which in context means Mr. Everyman or man-on-the-street. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Mathematical modeling versus a blacksmith
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Colin Hercus colinher...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jed, Google have published some details of their algorithm and that's pretty much how it works. If they want to do say English/Italian translation they find a lot of text (books, menus etc.) that exist in both languages and then they analyse the text counting words by frequency. This gives first mapping between words. There's a lot more to it but frequency mapping is a key element. They must have trained their system using some books where Rossi had been translated to Smith. It's interesting that the computer learns to translate just by analysis of these dual language texts and with very little human input or language understanding. Colin Interesting. I wonder if human-computers followed similar rules to translate the texts on the Rosetta stone. Harry
